Marcus v. Collins Building & Construction Co.
This text of 27 Misc. 784 (Marcus v. Collins Building & Construction Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
The only question involved in this appeal is whether -a certain paper is a lease or a mere agreement for a lease. As the paper contains all' the terms and conditions necessary to a valid binding contract between the parties, the unfulfilled transcription of the same terms and conditions into a more formal document' does not impair the validity of the original contract. Therefore, what was paid under it was rent. The fact that the. [785]*785amount was exactly one month’s installment arid that the plaintiff accepted a receipt as for rent, weigh heavily against his - attempt to regain the money on the ground that it was a deposit.
The recovery of the money paid was, therefore, properly denied • him. The judgment should be affirmed.
Fbeedmae, P. J., and MaoLeae, J., concur.
Judgment affirmed, with costs to the respondent.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
27 Misc. 784, 57 N.Y.S. 737, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/marcus-v-collins-building-construction-co-nyappterm-1899.